Your cart is currently empty!
Equality
Lets open this up with a quote:
“If you have something to say, write an equation. If you don’t have anything to say, write an essay”. — Paul Erdös
You see, we need equality to write an equation. We need the notion of equality to conceive of a tonal world, a world which symbols can describe. It turns out the “real world” is not tonal. Symbols never give you precise reality; the map is not the territory. However, seeing as you are “reading” at this very moment, and things seem to at least partially be “working”, lets continue. Why not? Communication, though imperfect (see Shannon for details), is something worth doing. To do so requires equality – on many levels. In fact, we can phrase a stronger statement:
For all objects A and B chosen from any sets SA and SB, there exists an infinite set of functions fi such that:
Or more simply put: all things are equal, for an infinite number of metrics. To not see a myriad of ways that any object is equal to another is to simply have a broken imagination. How is 100 like 1? How is the sun like an electron? How is an apple like another apple, or like a racecar? It’s called thinking.
Now that we have established that all things are equal (and that it’s possible to think) lets look at the converse: all things are unequal.
For all objects A and B chosen from any sets SA and SB, an infinite set of functions gi exist such that:
This seems obvious, but consider the case when A and B are the same object. Does such a function exist? In fact it does. Is it possible that:
?
Well yes. The A on the left is “on the left” whereas the A on the right is “on the right”. Is that enough? Also there exist functions such as:
where y increments upon every evaluation of h. For such functions, we can easily construct an h and g such that :
g(0)==g(0)
is false.
So lets review. All objects have equality under some metrics. No objects have equality under all metrics.
Now go write some equations.
Comments
4 responses to “Equality”
-
[…] The notion that an asymmetric relationship, without a base of mutual respect and equality, could be in any sense […]
-
[…] – devoid of the joy that normal folk can achieve with respectful productive relationships rooted in equality. The function of the colonialist in the world is to provide an example to others of the archetype […]
-
[…] We've talked about equality here before. Public coin is absolutely equal with regards to the people that use and issue it, all people must follow exactly the same rules. Fiat currency is the opposite, forcing a class structure of issuers and non-issuers upon the populace. Bitcoin is clearly the winner here. Sure, there are perhaps 1000 people who own 40% of all the bitcoins. There will always be some inequality in this regard. However, they can't issue themselves new ones and so they are at least in that regard equal to the rest of us. Thus public currencies present a clear improvement in equality. 1-0 public coin takes it. […]
-
[…] One might argue that the entire class system we enjoy today is based on the ability of the people on top to issue currency while others must work for it. In this way public coins go for the head of the fiat capitalist system and try to decapitate it – nobody can issue bitcoins in private, not even the wealthiest kings. However, we're already getting way ahead here, let's stick with the symbolism as we warm up. The fact that it's public and open sourcento all people should already ring some bells that the agenda here is pushing some nonsense about how all people are equal. […]
Leave a Reply